MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401112704 · doi:10.3390/en17153759

3D Numerical Modeling to Assess the Energy Performance of Solid–Solid Phase Change Materials in Glazing Systems

2024· article· en· W4401112704 on OpenAlexaff
Hossein Arasteh, Wahid Maref, Hamed H. Saber

Bibliographic record

VenueEnergies · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPhase Change Materials Research
Canadian institutionsÉcole de Technologie SupérieureUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGlazingMaterials sciencePhase-change materialEnvironmental sciencePhase (matter)Nuclear engineeringRange (aeronautics)Composite materialStructural engineeringPhase changeThermodynamicsEngineeringChemistryPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This research investigates the energy efficiency of a novel double-glazing system incorporating solid–solid phase change materials (SSPCMs), which offer significant advantages over traditional liquid–solid phase change materials. The primary objective of this study is to develop a 3D numerical model using the finite volume method, which will be followed by a parametric study under real climatic boundary conditions. A proposed double-glazing setup featuring a 2 mm layer of SSPCM applied on the inner glass pane within the air gap is modeled and analyzed. The simulations consider various transient temperatures and ranges of the SSPCM to evaluate the energy performance of the system under different weather conditions of Miami, FL during the coldest and hottest days of the year, both in sunny and cloudy conditions. The results demonstrate a notable improvement in energy performance compared to standard double-glazing windows (DGWs), with the most efficient SSPCM configuration exhibiting a phase transition temperature and range of 25 °C and 1 °C, respectively. This configuration achieved energy savings of 24%, 26%, and 23% during summer sunny, winter sunny, and winter cloudy days, respectively, relative to DGWs during cooling and heating degree hours. However, a 3% energy loss was observed during summer cloudy days. Overall, the findings of this study have shown the potential for energy savings by incorporating SSPCM with suitable thermophysical properties into double-glazing systems.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.163
Threshold uncertainty score0.572

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.104
GPT teacher head0.359
Teacher spread0.255 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnergiesSame topicPhase Change Materials ResearchFrench-language works237,207